CROWN APPEALS COP CASE, BLAMES JUDGE

But Lawyers Believe Collapse Of Corruption Case Rooted More With
Ministry's Criminal Division

The papers filed by the Crown to appeal Justice Ian Nordheimer's stay
of the corruption case against Toronto police officers make one thing
perfectly clear: the attorney general's ministry thinks the judge was
the problem.

But lawyers familiar with the attorney general's office believe the
collapse of the case is a symptom of larger difficulties in the
ministry's criminal law division, which handles most big prosecutions
in Ontario.

"There are concerns, and have been for some time, about prosecutions
being done out of the Crown law office," said Toronto lawyer Doug
Hunt, who served as assistant deputy minister to Attorney General Ian
Scott in the late 1980s and had a key role in creating the justice
prosecutions unit.

A string of recent failures point to a pattern of poor judgment, an
unwillingness to learn from past mistakes and a failure to heed
warnings, numerous legal experts contend.

Others suggest the problems with big prosecutions may stem from a
mismatch between the traditional expertise of the Crown law office --
intellectually focused appeals -- and the skills demanded in the
rough-and-tumble world of criminal trials, especially when shrewd
defence lawyers are on the other side.

The Crown law office's probe into the six police officers spanned a
decade, cost millions and drew in scores of other officers, saddled
with the unpleasant task of scrutinizing their own.

More than 2,000 criminal cases were re-examined, more than 500,000
pages of evidence gathered and eventually 29 criminal charges,
including perjury and theft, were laid against six Toronto Police
Service drug squad officers. RCMP deputy commissioner John Neily, who
led the task force, called it the "largest police corruption scandal
known in Canadian history."

But when it came time to manoeuvre the case through the courts, the
momentum evaporated. Nordheimer said as much when he stayed the
charges Jan. 31 because of unreasonable delay. The Crown had no
explanation for the "glacial" pace, he said.

Ministry spokesperson Brendan Crawley said that any suggestion Crown
attorneys on the corruption case exercised poor judgment or missed
warning signs are "baseless." The ministry has full confidence in its
ability to manage and carry out all prosecutions, he added.

Most major cases are prosecuted by lawyers in the ministry's criminal
law branch. Cases involving police officers or others employed in the
justice system are handled by the ministry's justice prosecutions
unit. Other big cases are assigned to the Crown law office's criminal
law division.

The bread-and-butter work of the approximately 80 lawyers employed by
the office is criminal appeals, but big trials end up there, too, in
part because they'd overwhelm a local Crown attorney's office but also
because the lawyers who work there have traditionally been considered
some of the province's brightest.

But recently, the office has witnessed the embarrassing demise of two
other massive prosecutions -- the tainted blood trial and another case
involving six former tobacco executives accused of masterminding an
alleged smuggling ring.

The case collapsed last May, when a judge threw out the charges after
a two-year preliminary hearing.

In the blood case, four doctors and an American pharmaceutical company
were acquitted last fall when an Ontario Superior Court judge ruled
the Crown's own evidence exonerated the defendants. The defence hadn't
called one shred of evidence.

It was "almost unprecedented," says Ottawa lawyer Michael Neville, who
represented Dr. Wark Boucher in the case.